Developing the soil component of e-SOTER Szent István University Soil Team Mickolc University Soil Team (Erika Michéli, Endre Dobos present here) TASKS • Revise the SOTER soil component data structure • Compilation of the soil data base for the 1:1M windows (Filling the soil attribute database) • Development of translation and correlation tools for harmonizing soil data Revision of the SOTER soil component data structure Based on and compatible with the original Procedures Manual (van Engelen and Wen, 1995), and modified according to and harmonized by recent standards, and available data. Terms, definitions and coding of soil profile and horizon descriptions follow the FAO Guidelines for Soil description (2006), the WRB (2006) (including the new guideline for map legend construction, 2010 → WRB 2014). The data structure itself has not changed significantly. WRB RSG and 2 qualifiers (not enough!) The e‐SOTER attribute coding guideline and the data entry format is available on the project team site ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/docs/guidel_soil_descr.pdf http://www.isric.org/Isric/Webdocs/Docs/ISRIC_ TechPap09_2002.pdf • Compilation of the soil data base for the 1:1M windows (Filling the soil attribute database) • Development of translation and correlation tools for harmonizing soil data Compilation of the soil data base for the 1:1M windows (Filling the soil attribute database) Problems Data collection methods are very diverse All project partners have their own national soil classification systems Data base structures and availability are diverse Soil Classification Why harmonizing? Gelisols (ST) Cryozems (Russia) Cryosols (WRB) World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2006: ftp://ftp.fao.org/agl/agll/docs/wsrr103e.pdf 2014: http://www.fao.org/3/a‐i3794e.pdf A tool for unifying national soil information Csernozjom (H) Cernice (Cz) Schwarzerde (D) Mollisol (USA) Mollic horizon Mollic horizon Mollic horizon Mollic horizon Calcic horizonCalcic horizon Calcic horizon Calcic horizon Chernozems Podzol Podzol Podzol Podzol Podzol HSkCzDkF Leptic Skeletic Hyperdistric Humic Hyperdistric argic argic spodic spodic spodic Luvisol Alisol Podzol Podzol Podzol Methods for correlation • Expert knowledge based (based on concept or actual data) • Classification algorithm based (re‐classification) from data • Based on calculated taxonomic distances Minimum data need / availability in the windows (CEU) CEU No of Total CZ DE HU SK window horizons % (%) (%) (%) (%) total (%) Horizon designation 4889 96 100 100 99 71 99 Moist Color 2809 55 16 42 96 71 55 Particle size class 4769 94 95 72 97 100 94 pH H2O 3580 71 45 0 97 100 66 EC 1950 38 1 0 83 68 40 exNa 2404 47 4 0 95 30 45 CEC 3943 78 73 1 97 99 79 Carbonate 2046 40 32 2 47 100 39 OC 4175 82 85 0 94 98 83 BS 3585 71 86 0 94 0 80 Data availability in the windows (WEU, CN, MA) WEU CN MA FR GB CN MA window window window (%) (%) (%) (%) total (%) total (%) total (%) Horizon designation 100 98 98 99 99 25 25 Moist Color 100 43 45 100 100 25 25 Particle size class 58 91 90 99 99 94 94 pH H2O 100 94 94 100 100 96 96 EC 0333239392020 exNa 308 28 40 77 77 86 86 CEC 92 48 50 100 100 70 70 Carbonate 100 76 77 42 42 25 25 OC 100 80 80 40 40 98 98 BS 07 7 0 0 0 0 Methods for correlation Classification algorithm based (re‐classification) Step 1. definition of the diagnostics Step 2. definition of the RSGs Step 3. definition of the qualifiers Mollic horizon Criteria Availability Structure Partly available 45% of profiles missing Munsell colour Partly available •moist 32% of profiles missing •dry 94% of profiles missing Organic carbon Mostly available Base saturation Partly available (pH) 40% of profiles missing Thickness Not given ‐ determined 6major diagnostic requirements , 4has sub requirements, 2 has 3rd level sub requirements, includes 10 ORs and 12 ANDs Argic horizon Criteria Availability Texture Mostly available Clay content Mostly available Morphological Mostly NOT available evidence of clay illuviation Vertical distance Mostly NOT available of clay increase No natric horizon Not given determined Thickness Not given determined Horizon Symbol Eberhardt and Waltner „B..t, ..[+‐]B..t, 2b ..+Bbt, Bbt+Cv“? Further Pedogenic Lab Results Properties “oriented clay “T, [tap,ag] “? bodies in thin sections cover at least 1 %“? Check Lower Lab Results boundary “COLE ≥ 0,04”? Distinctness of overlying horizon “[abrupt, clear] “? 3a Check Upper boundary Distincness and Clay Lab Results content of overlying No Argic horizon “Ratio of fine clay and horizon “Gradual AND total clay ≥ 1.2 times {{{Clay content/Clay as high as in the layer content horizon above}‐ above with coarser 1}*7.5} ≤30 cm “? Fine Earth Texture”? Check Upper boundary Check Upper Distincness and Clay boundary content “Gradual AND Distinctness {{{Clay content/Clay “[abrupt, clear] “? content horizon above}‐ 3b 1}*7.5} ≤15 cm “? 5 4 Check horizon “does fulfill No Argic criteria of a natric horizon “? horizon Explanations Horizon symbol (Field or Analytical) parameter “7“? Is 7 ? “[7,8]“? Is either 7 or 8? Yes branch A… Starts with an A (case‐sensitive) Decision Compare with other Result …A… Contains an A (case‐sensitive) horizons above or No branch below Medium part of the algorithm for the argic horizon with German soil data, which includes altogether 31 decisions. Lab parameters are highlighted with green colour, numbers relate to criteria of WRB (continuous line marks start of the criterion, dashed line means 'continue with the respective criterion'). Simplified definition for mollic horizon 1. OC > 0,6%; and 2. a Munsell value (moist) of 3 and a chroma (moist) of 3 or less; and 3. a Munsell value (dry) of 5 and a chroma (dry) of 5 or less (if data available); and 4. B% > 50; and 5. a thickness > 25 cm; or 6. a thickness > 10 cm if directly overlying continuous rock; 7. surface horizon Simplified definition for argic horizon 1. if the overlying horizon has < 15% clay, at least 3 percent more clay content increase in the underlying horizon; or 2. if the overlying horizon has a clay content between 15‐ 40%, the ratio of clay in the underlying to that of the overlying horizon must be 1.2 or more; or 3. if the overlying horizon has > 40% or more clay, the underlying horizon must contain at least 8 percent more clay; or 4. morphological evidence of clay illuviation in soil description (i.e. cutanic qualifier); and 5. does not form part of a natric horizon. Simplified key ‐ Sequence kept! Simplified WRB RSG set of diagnostics Step 2. Step 3. definition of the qualifiers Same (simplfied way as diagnostics) Methods for correlation • Expert knowledge based (based on concept or actual data) • Classification algorithm based (re‐classification) • Based on calculated taxonomic distances Taxonomic distance calculations were applied for correlation of national soil classes to WRB RSGs. Performed based: on real data (centroid values), or concepts (coded likelyhood of proprties) Tested in the HU part of the CE window 21 soil groups matched with the dominant identifiers Soil Groups 13 WRB RSGs 7 HU forest soiltypes identifiers Codes express the likelyhood of the presence of the selected dominant identifiers such as: 0 ‐ cannot be present, 0.5 – likely to be present, 18 Dominant 1‐ must be present The calculated taxonomic distances between the tested units Natralbolls Argialbolls Cryaqolls Duraquolls Natraquolls Calciaquolls Argiaquolls Epiaquolls Endoaquolls Cryrendolls Haplrendolls Haplogellols Duricryolss Natricryolls Paleocryolls Argicryolls Calcicryolls Haplocryolls Durixerolls Natrixerolls Palexerolls Cacixerolls Aregixerolls Haploxerolls Durustolls Natrustoll Calciustolls Paleoustolls Argiustolls Vermustolls Haplustolls Natrudolls Calciudolls Paloudolls Argiudolls Vermudtolls Hapludtolls Slonetz Solonchak Leptosols Durisols Gypsisols Chernozems Kastanozems Phaeozems Natralbolls 0,00 1,39 2,08 1,82 0,61 1,94 1,97 1,92 2,06 2,86 2,81 2,26 2,54 2,05 2,69 2,67 2,82 2,60 2,50 2,03 2,49 2,74 2,45 2,32 2,51 1,85 2,72 2,37 2,40 2,41 2,19 1,80 2,54 2,40 2,46 2,40 2,14 0,97 1,71 2,84 2,51 2,38 2,51 2,50 2,49 Argialbolls 1,39 0,00 2,00 1,97 1,60 1,92 1,64 1,87 2,02 2,72 2,56 2,17 2,62 2,42 2,41 2,38 2,74 2,51 2,44 2,41 2,26 2,54 2,05 2,19 2,50 2,32 2,68 2,14 2,05 2,12 1,87 2,22 2,50 2,14 2,06 2,14 2,06 1,70 2,06 2,74 2,60 2,47 2,15 2,25 2,12 Cryaqolls 2,08 2,00 0,00 1,62 1,82 1,44 1,35 1,50 1,48 2,37 2,49 2,30 2,12 1,94 2,11 1,89 1,94 1,92 2,66 2,66 2,62 2,49 2,25 2,28 2,50 2,42 2,41 2,36 2,33 2,21 2,09 2,30 2,26 2,19 2,12 2,05 2,03 2,03 2,37 2,69 2,78 2,55 2,32 2,30 2,32 Duraquolls 1,82 1,97 1,62 0,00 1,60 1,64 1,60 1,58 1,48 2,60 2,59 2,36 2,09 2,29 2,51 2,41 2,52 2,41 2,30 2,51 2,67 2,70 2,33 2,33 2,12 2,12 2,51 2,36 2,22 2,29 2,18 2,14 2,29 2,22 2,21 2,14 2,12 1,84 2,21 2,67 2,37 2,42 2,45 2,46 2,42 Natraquolls 0,61 1,60 1,82 1,60 0,00 1,62 1,77 1,71 1,87 2,80 2,78 2,24 2,38 1,92 2,60 2,52 2,66 2,47 2,42 2,00 2,46 2,65 2,32 2,21 2,38 1,75 2,60 2,42 2,42 2,44 2,25 1,80 2,46 2,40 2,41 2,37 2,14 0,83 1,64 2,84 2,46 2,33 2,54 2,52 2,54 Calciaquolls 1,94 1,92 1,44 1,64 1,62 0,00 1,41 1,09 1,37 2,49 2,40 2,09 2,30 2,25 2,42 2,24 2,02 2,06 2,29 2,37 2,49 2,03 2,03 1,80 2,28 2,36 2,15 2,26 2,37 2,11 2,02 2,35 2,11 2,18 2,25 2,03 2,14 1,79 2,02 2,44 2,36 2,14 2,25 2,18 2,36 Argiaquolls 1,97 1,64 1,35 1,60 1,77 1,41 0,00 1,35 1,80 2,66 2,60 2,18 2,46 2,36 2,26 2,18 2,44 2,42 2,62 2,67 2,49 2,60 2,15 2,40 2,49 2,46 2,52 2,18 2,15 2,14 2,02 2,32 2,38 2,09 2,02 2,06 2,11 1,98 2,36 2,88 2,75 2,51 2,36 2,40 2,36 Epiaquolls 1,92 1,87 1,50 1,58 1,71 1,09 1,35 0,00 1,25 2,62 2,56